UiPath Reviews

We use UiPath to understand and refine supply chain business processes. Our company is a solution integrator developing solutions for clients. We help companies undergo a digital transformation and digitize existing processes and systems.

You can monitor and automate existing processes, but it's challenging if there's a skill involved. You need to optimize the process and ensure the system is fully integrated. You're pushing the data into UiPath and optimizing the process. You want to integrate it with another system that isn't part of your environment or improve your process. In that case, sometimes you don't have the data in place. That is what you call process mining or process automation.

If you want to understand the processes you have in place, UiPath can help you understand the gap between the design and execution. For example, you can see if the data is pointed in the right direction and identify where your process has problems. You can also integrate some monitoring capabilities to detect some patterns. 

Another important thing for our organization is migration. If you want to change something or relocate a process, you can measure and transfer those things. If the method you want to migrate isn't in place, you need to create something from scratch that currently lacks support. UiPath is suitable for detecting and monitoring existing processes but is not good at identifying new flows, cases, and procedures. That's one area where it needs to improve.

UiPath helped minimize our on-premise footprint. We use AI for some aspects, such as detection and segmentation. Some companies implemented ChatGPT-type functionality, but we haven't tried that. 

UiPath substantially reduced human error. It speeds up the business. You can communicate with the customer and show them what's happening. That's the advantage. It frees up employee time because it's an automated process, and you can replace a lot of labor with the tools and the general report. It depends on the data and the efficiency of the data integration, but you can save 20 to 60 percent of labor time.

I like how you can download the log and perform static analysis. You can also do dynamic monitoring to look into the system integration. The ease of building automation depends on the vendor you are integrating. You bring data in and push it out through the API. It's relatively easy either way. 

The UiPath community is helpful because you can ask questions and get tips from other people on best practices. Many of the problems have already been resolved by others so you can get advice from those people. You can also see how other people use the system. 

UiPath could add more interactive features that enable you to explore and design processes from scratch. There should be more features that support the digital transformation process from the design phase. In the current data panel, you need to start with a process that's already in place. 

You can do end-to-end automation with UiPath, but the problem is that the system hasn't been integrated from that perspective, so UiPath has some disadvantages. It's easier to handle an existing system in UiPath, but it's harder to integrate and model a new system. 

I have used UiPath for about a year. Before I started using UiPath, I was involved in developing these kinds of processes for more than 10 years, so I'm experienced in this area.

Deploying UiPath is straightforward. We had a team of two people primarily responsible for the deployment and one or two additional staff. 

We worked with UiPath during the deployment. They have a consulting team that we use when possible. 

The real ROI comes in the later process monitoring stage. You need to spend money initially planning and building processes. Once you get to the evaluation phase, you start to recognize the advantage of using these tools.

Most tools have a trial license. With UiPath, you need to pay from the beginning. Many customers aren't familiar with the product, so it would be helpful if they offered a free evaluation period. 

We need experience with UiPath because we have to convince the customer to adopt it.

We evaluated several other options, but I can't recall which ones. UiPath's advantage is that you can do system automation. 

I rate UiPath an eight out of ten.

We primarily work with banking clients at a high level, automating solution points, nodes, and bot processes to reduce demand. For example, if a task was previously performed by a hundred people, we have now limited it to around five to ten people by implementing automation to closely monitor the bots in real-time to ensure their effectiveness.

Building automation using UiPath is easy and in most cases can be done with a single click. There is no need to write coding. We can insert and delete columns or remove duplicate frames easily. 

We have already implemented a couple of solutions, one of which is a maintenance automation database. The users of the database want to send emails with attached files and other artifacts, and previously this was done manually. Each day, up to 300-500 items were manually processed by 50-60 people who would navigate to a separate application, search for the file, upload it, and send the email. This was a tedious task and accuracy and reliability were questionable, requiring manual verification. This process was repeated monthly for around 10,000-12,000 items, taking around 25-30 days to complete. We automated this process and provided a high-level solution initially, which was later built, bought, and deployed. The bot we created is capable of processing 900-950 items per day, meaning that all 10,000 items can be processed within eight to ten days. This reduces the processing time by one-third and the cost from 100 to around 12 months, as we only need three to four rotational shifts to monitor the bot. Sometimes the bot may disconnect or encounter issues beyond our control, but we address these promptly to reinstate the process. This is the work we are doing in our organization.

End-to-end automation is a crucial aspect of completing tasks within the specified time frame. Clients do not want to wait for extended periods, such as a month or two, and prefer to see progress at least one-third or one-fourth of the way through. This ensures that clients are not preoccupied with a single task and can focus on improving their business while also increasing accuracy. UiPath aims to provide clients with a high return on investment from both the software build and business development perspectives. This is achieved by delivering effective solutions that meet clients' needs.

We are satisfied with UiPath's community. Occasionally, we encounter some queries or doubts, such as whether we should use a particular feature or MAC code, or whether we can use a certain file. While we cannot always rely on direct support for such minor issues, we found that the UiPath community can be a helpful resource. We search for similar issues that other users may have faced and posted about, and we often find solutions to our questions in a timely manner. Overall, we find the UiPath community to be effective and useful.

UiPath has helped our client reduce their on-premises footprint. This decision is purely based on the client's interests and has nothing to do with our personal or company interests. Generally, clients prefer cloud integration as they want their systems to be up and running 99.9 percent of the time. However, sometimes they may opt for on-premises solutions based on the CDRT of a particular application, which refers to the sensitivity of the data involved. We have some limited automation that deals with sensitive information, such as credit-related automation, which the client cannot access. In such cases, clients may prefer an on-premises solution, but overall, cloud integration is becoming more important.

With the implementation of AI, we can utilize UiPath for automation, which is more dependable.

UiPath reduces the cost of digital transformation.

Our clients are highly satisfied with the nearly 99 percent reduction in human error achieved through the use of UiPath. This includes both individual and team errors. However, during the development phase, some human input was necessary to create rules for the bot to follow. Any potential issues were identified and resolved during testing by our IT and testing teams. Overall, our clients are pleased with the system's reliability and performance.

The architecture of UiPath is a unique feature compared to other solutions. 

The ease of integration is a valuable feature.

Debugging files is easy to do using UiPath.

Some of our customers have experienced performance issues after the latest update.

The licensing cost is high and has room for improvement.

Some of the APA integrations are complicated and have room for improvement.

I have been using UiPath for four years.

In general, UiPath is a stable platform. However, the performance tends to slow down frequently after updates.

UiPath is scalable.

The technical support and documentation are good.

Positive

In 2017 and 2018, we utilized Blue Prism in the preliminary stage. However, we subsequently discovered that it was not appropriate for our clients due to its intricate architecture and high cost compared to UiPath. UiPath, on the other hand, offers a more user-friendly experience by integrating everything into a single platform.

The initial setup can be described as neither straightforward nor complex. I give the initial setup a five out of ten. We experience smooth operation once we finish setting up and deploying. If a person has three to four years of experience and is familiar with all the necessary processes for deployment, I believe that only one or two people, excluding the developer and tester, are needed to deploy the entire package to the host. Sometimes even just one person can handle the task, but we can assume two people will be sufficient. They will be deploying the product on the cloud, as there is a single package that has been moved from the latest enrollment.

We implement UiPath for our customers.

UiPath has been instrumental in saving our customers money, which is the primary reason why they have adopted it. Instead of using the traditional method, UiPath's automation has streamlined processes for over 10,000 products, leading to a reduction in manpower by almost 90 percent. This has significantly decreased the turnaround time from 28 days to 12 days, making clients exceedingly satisfied and unwilling to risk their business due to potential delays. As a result, UiPath has provided us with a tenfold return on investment.

The licensing cost is high.

I give UiPath a nine out of ten.

UiPath does not require maintenance, however, it does require a person to monitor the bot and ensure that it is functioning properly.

UiPath's architecture is simple and straightforward. I recommend the solution.

I'm using it for the automation of various tasks. It depends on the tasks the users define. If we have a task that results in human error, or if we want a positive output in a small amount of time, or if we are working on huge amounts of data, we use UiPath.

It helps a lot in eliminating human error, by up to 50 percent for us, and in providing stability compared to other tools. It provides high performance and makes it easier to get positive output from automation.

If you have a huge data set and you want to upgrade results, the AI capabilities in UiPath reduce human errors and give a positive result in a small amount of time.

It also helps speed up digital transformation and has freed up some employees' time by as much as 70 to 80 percent.

We are using the PDF functions for scraping. Also, security-wise, it is very easy.

The ease of building automations is a 10 out of 10. It automates our tasks faster and gives us positive and accurate results. The UI is easy to use and does not require much training. A new user can use it.

Also, the UiPath user community is very good. If you have any questions, you can ask the community and a developer will help you as soon as possible. It has been a great experience for me.

I did one of the UiPath Academy courses last year to improve my skills in automation. It helps a lot. I would recommend the Academy to everyone who is new to the tool. Take a course and you will learn a lot. It helps improve your skills, enhance your knowledge, and know about new features.

In terms of performance, sometimes it slows down when the internet connectivity is poor. They need to optimize it a little.

I have been using UiPath for the last two and a half years, approximately.

The stability is very good. It's a 10 out of 10 for reliability.

It's very scalable.

I have used Microsoft Power Automate, but UiPath is far better. UiPath is easier to use, easy to implement, and cheaper than Microsoft.

The setup is not very complex and not very easy. Overall, it's moderately straightforward. Every new user needs a little training but can use it after some time.

The amount of time it takes depends on the size of the project. Sometimes we can deploy in a few minutes and sometimes it takes up to two hours. The number of people involved also depends on the project. Sometimes, one person can deploy it and sometimes a team is required.

Implementation is done in-house.

It provides accurate results and great ROI. That's why we are using this tool for the end-to-end automation of tasks.

It is cheaper than Microsoft Power Automate and saves us between 50 and 70 percent on costs. UiPath's pricing is moderate and something everyone can afford.

We didn't evaluate any other options because UiPath offers every feature that is valuable and useful in automation.

Between the great ROI, speed, and AI capabilities, everything about it is positive for me.

Our customer had one attended robot and wanted to scale up. We used UiPath to identify possible processes that could be automated and also required the ability to scale up the architecture.

The ability to use end-to-end automation with UiPath is the key to success but it takes a lot of work.

UiPath has absolutely helped minimize our on-premises footprint by automating.

The solution has helped speed up and reduce the cost of digital transformation.

I believe UiPath has reduced human error.

The solution has freed up employee time through the automation provided. 

If we go into every specific role in every specific use case, depending on the role, we have the capacity to free up over 50 percent of employee administrative time. 

The solution enables us to implement end-to-end automation.

The entire training support package provides different paths we can follow according to different roles. Automating basic processes is very easy. The setup phase is very quick.

The possibilities with process mining are fantastic.

They offer new vendors UI Academy courses and the four-hour BA course gave me the basic knowledge I required.

The vendor can improve the solution by building up the BA path included in the UI Academy courses. There's too much focus on development, but not enough on BAs, scrum masters, and project managers alike. 

I am interested in low code as a general concept and would like to have a better methodology for how BAs and other IT professionals can be closely connected with professional developers and included in the automation process.

I would like to have integration with other programming languages. We primarily need to know Visual Basic or C Sharp to develop using more traditional development. For example, for front-end automation, it would be helpful to use Javascript instead.

I used the solution for a few months.

The stability is good. I did not encounter any issues with UiPath.

We conducted a pre-study using the solution and we saw the possibilities to scale up.

I give the solution a nine out of ten.

Building automation using UiPath requires some level of technical expertise. As a BA, I have some programming experience, but not in-depth programming knowledge and that is enough for me to automate some basic processes, following the training. I worked together with senior developers who would be able to automate more advanced processes, but we didn't get to that level in the project.

We prepared the information and I was involved in the UiPath training, but we didn't get to actually scale up and automate new processes because the project was never completed.

I'm currently working on a pre-study for a large company in the public sector, and they are not using UiPath presently. The organization is currently using NICE but UiPath is one of the solutions that I'll advise them to continue evaluating.

In Sweden, there are a lot of issues and different regulations around GDPR, so we always deploy on-premises.

I would recommend that anyone thinking about using UiPath should have knowledge of the entire ecosystem in order to get the full experience. The concept of intelligent automation is the track that UiPath is on right now with integrating AI solutions for identifying processes. A new user should take a more holistic approach. Focus on identifying, assessing, and not just automating processes. 

We develop and deploy use cases in the area of the cloud. We have deployed over 100 use cases. Most of our use cases are related to SAP applications, web applications, and mainframe applications.

One use case example is related to mainframe applications. The bot monitors mainframe applications 24/7. If there are any new jobs, they are identified, then the bot changes the status of the job to differentiate it. 

Previously, we are using the 2016 version of Orchestrator, then we upgraded to the 2018 version of Orchestrator. Some clients are deploying the 2020 version. It depends on the client. We suggest using a version back to clients, i.e., the 2019 version. 

We automate retail, sales, and agricultural services.

There are a bunch of candidates being monitored 24x7. Automation Cloud monitors these jobs, and whenever new docs come into the application, it will then change the status manually based upon certain conditions. Once we deploy the automation into the production, our manpower has been reduced so there are only one or two people needed for the backup. The rest will be taken care of by the automation itself. So, there has been a drastic reduction in our workforce.

We schedule different jobs using Orchestrator only. We have a separate team who takes care of jobs that we apply in Orchestrator. So, if there are any failures, it will automatically send email alerts to us. 

Within Orchestrator, there is a tab where we can restrict roles from the admin level to the user level. Developers give only access to the jobs. Whereas, admins have a roles option to restrict access.

There are still some areas that need improvements. Currently, the tool is not 100 percent accurate with hand written notes and image based automation. It is also tedious using it with Word applications. 

We are doing automation to take care of all our processes, but we still need support people 24/7 to monitor these jobs. So, human intervention is still there. We have two people monitoring these automations 24/7 because there are still some challenges with the automation.

I have been working with it for two and a half years.

When new bots are developed, we definitely see some errors in the first few days, which are usually connector issues. Once the bot is moved to production and has a lot of enhancements and patches to the automations, we make sure that the automation is running smoothly. So, during the initial stages, it won't be very stable, but after a few enhancements to adjust to the automation as time goes, then it will become stable.

Once we deploy and release the automation into production, we will monitor production to see if there are any new challenges, different scenarios, or bugs that we need to fix. We have monitored the automation after deployment for around six to seven months, and the automation went smoothly without any issues. Because the automation is performing pretty well, we have deployed it to more of our workforce and their different jobs.

We have separate, dedicated test data in three different environments. Orchestrator has a database and email server, so everything is in Orchestrator. Apart from the servers, products, and services, everything has a separate operations team, which has eight to 10 members, who take care of everything.

Previously, they used on-premises services for the bots. Then, they asked us to migrate more than 20 bots from on-premises to our AWS environment. So, we have created a dedicated AWS environment for them.

The deployment process goes this way: 

1. Developers develop the use case in a development environment. 
2. Once that is done, then they will move the code to the non-cloud environment.
3. They will test the code if the automation is running fine or not. If automation is running fine, they will show the data which is running fine as a code to the client. 
4. Once they have the desired output, then we will move to the production environment. 
5. The operations team will then deploy that process. 

The first time, it is a bit tricky. Going to production, it will take around 20 to 30 minutes to deploy the first time. If there is already existing automation, we only need a patch to implement it in production, then it will take roughly five to 10 minutes to apply.

The process of testing and deploying code takes roughly one to four nights maximum.

For deploying UiPath, we need at least three to four RPA developers. In general, one person can deploy at any time. The other two to three people are just there on support calls. 

Post-production, we have an operations team of eight to 10 members who take care of the automation.

There are some automations that save us thousands of hours monthly. These are automations that we run 24/7 as well as some automations that we run every five minutes for installing backups. Depending upon the amount of time the automation is standing, we will manage the capabilities of the server. 

To some extent, it has reduced the operations:

1. The automation is sending an email whenever there will be an error. Automatically, it is not going to the user. The user just needs to verify their emails. 
2. Whenever an error is noticed in the code, the automation will fit the address and email the operations team members. 

In these ways, it has helped to reduce operation costs, but not completely.

There are three types of licenses: unattended, attended, and developer.

We also use Automation Anywhere (version 10) and Blue Prism automation tools, but I think most clients prefer UiPath. There are more activities available in UiPath versus the Automation Anywhere version that we use. For example, UiPath has database-related activities, but Automation Anywhere, version 10, does not have this feature. I have tried using mainframe appliances in UiPath and Automation Anywhere, and I found that UiPath is more flexible and has more options available.

The solution is single sign-on, so the authentication is done for us, because it is difficult to remember all our passwords.

We have a ServiceNow ticketing tool for reporting issues related to UiPath.

UiPath is very good for developing web-based applications, especially for SAP and the web. For these two applications, you can go with UiPath without any doubts.

I would rate this solution as an eight (out of 10).

I have several use cases but primarily I use UiPath to input transaction data to the websites.

UiPath has helped us improve operational efficiency by automating tasks previously performed by humans. This frees up employees to focus on more meaningful and strategic work. In one project, we achieved 100 percent automation, while another reached approximately 70 percent.

Building automation using UiPath is easy even for inexperienced users.

We use UiPath to automate production processes in the healthcare industry.

To automate end-to-end processes, we employed multiple UiPath bots, as a single bot couldn't handle the entire process due to the disparate nature of the systems involved. These bots consisted of a web automation bot, a secure automation bot, and an existing legacy automation bot, which served as the backbone of the automation.

The UiPath User Community is accessible through the UiPath developer portal. It's a valuable resource full of information, where we can learn about the impact of new releases from other users and experts.

In the time I have been using Uipath, I have noticed that the text recognition tools have improved making it the best in the market.

UiPath has been beneficial in helping to minimize our on-premise footprint by automating 100 percent of some tasks.

As developers my team and I use the Developer Academy courses from UiPath to get certified. We also use the courses to help train new users which is helpful.

I am happy with the AI functionality. It has helped reduce the development time for us.

The AI functionality has helped us to automate more processes overall.

UiPath helps speed up our digital transformation and reduce the cost. Our digital transformation using UiPath did not require complex upgrades or application support.

UiPath reduces human error by 80 percent, enabling faster transaction rates compared to manual processing.

UiPath is the most user-friendly automation tool in the RPA category.

Storing data partially using internal data tables for internal calculations, without relying on a full database, is most beneficial for our workflows.

Computational text recognition has room for improvement as it is not 100 percent accurate.

I have been using UiPath for around two years.

I would rate the stability of UiPath ten out of ten.

I would rate the scalability of UiPath ten out of ten.

The technical support is good.

Positive

I previously used Blue Prism but found UiPath to be the most user-friendly.

The deployment was straightforward and took two hours to complete using four people.

UiPath is expensive which is why we need to have bots that run 24/7 to maximize the work and justify the cost.

I would rate UiPath nine out of ten.

We have UiPath deployed in one location.

Maintenance is only required when changes are made to the website.

I recommend UiPath to others.

We are an insurance company. We mainly deal with all types of insurance from casualty and specialty to even aviation and medical stop loss.

I have had use cases where we have been taking information from emails and phone calls to put them into a mainframe. We have done claims intake for insurance, and then we have notifications. For the policy system, we have done a lot of back-office accounting work.

By implementing UiPath, we were trying to seek a way to free hours up at critical times. It is not just about hours saved. It is also the quality of the hours that we save and freeing people up for more value-added work.

UiPath has definitely helped with scalability. The number one reason to use something like UiPath is to increase scalability so that we are less susceptible to changes in the market. We can grow our business without growing our staff hours.

UiPath has changed the way we perceive our processes because even outside of processes that we automate, we look at our processes in a new way in terms of process improvement. Not everything needs to be automated. Some things just need to have the process changed. It has helped us to be very critical of our processes and be more forward-thinking and not just sticking in the same ruts.

UiPath has helped with the accuracy. There is less fat fingering of things. When the robot is entering things into a system, it will put in exactly what was input into it. There is also a chance for transposing things, so there is a lot more accuracy in that respect.

UiPath has freed up time and resources for other tasks. That has been our main focus in terms of the ROI we look for. With the accounting back office practices, our close cycles are shorter, but people are not working more. With automation, we now have things that are on more of a 24-hour cycle. We are able to do a higher volume in less time.

We have saved thousands of hours not just in the back office accounting side for close cycles but also in insurance. We have busy seasons. We sometimes had to hire temporary workers. With the automation of our claims intake and other processes in that area, we are no longer hiring those temporary workers. We do not need them anymore.

The ability to connect various systems that do not have any kind of API between and the areas where we need to mimic what a human does to a system in terms of input and output is valuable. We primarily use UI automation where we simulate what a human does within an application. By using the right selectors, we try to find where on the screen we need to click. We take in information from input files. We use all the logic flowcharts and logic trees to determine where the information needs to go in a system.

Some of the areas around the administration aspect of UiPath, which is what I have been mostly working with over the past few years, can be better. From an organizational standpoint, some of the guidance there could use some work in terms of helping COEs know how to grow and how to take control of their organizations as they spread.

I have been using UiPath for about five years. 

There are still some stability issues. There are sometimes issues related to bots acting up. It can be hard to tell whether that is something related to how we developed it or whether the bots are having an issue. We are not sure why, but there are some stability issues.

Its scalability is fine. It has definitely gotten better over the past few years with all the improvements there. I know there have also been new offerings for serverless robots, which we have looked into, but they do not fit our needs. The UiPath Orchestrator makes it easy to maintain its governability as we scale, which is one of the main differentiators of this solution.

They can sometimes be hard to get a hold of. There have been a few times we have had to go to the UiPath Pro support. While we have eventually gotten to the solution, it has sometimes taken us a while to get in contact with someone who has the right knowledge to help us with our problem. I would rate their support an eight out of ten.

Positive

This is the first one we have been using. We have a group in the company that started using Power Automate. They ran into a problem and turned that back over to us. We are the UiPath team. They tried to automate something with Power Automate, and we ended up taking over that project.

Orchestration is the main differentiator between Power Automate and UiPath. UiPath has orchestration whereas Power Automate does not. Without that orchestration, you lose a lot of the value for these robots, especially at the organizational control level.

I was brought on specifically to do the deployment at my current company. It was fairly easy. I did an on-prem deployment about five years ago, and now, I am doing the cloud deployment. We are using the automation cloud. Having the automation cloud made it much easier to do the deployment this time than trying to set up the on-prem Orchestrator the first time.

In terms of the implementation strategy, we essentially looked at how many processes we had as candidates and what we thought the bot load would be. We stood up that many VMs. We deployed unattended robots to those. In terms of Orchestrator, we just did some basic tenant separation, and as we have grown, we have seen where to increase the bots.

We used one called Accelerate to start with. Our experience was fine. Our goal was always to transition to our own, so after the proof of concept was done, we hired our own developers. We hired our own team and went from there.

We have definitely seen ROI coming from it. For any project we take on, we look at both quantitative and qualitative aspects. Quantitative is usually just the hours saved. If a process is automated, how many hours are saved as compared to the last one? Qualitative would be things like whether we have increased accuracy, whether we have increased any time to the next process in the chain, or whether we have gained redundancy and reduced the fragility of our processes.

If it can be lower, we will always take lower.

Blue Prism was what we looked at pretty heavily. We looked at Pega. We also looked at Power Automate, and some groups within the company decided to try and use that. 

When comparing UiPath and Blue Prism, there is clearly a difference in power and capabilities between the two. We also had a solution partner who could work with us better with UiPath at the time.

We are currently setting up the AI Center. We have not used UiPath Process Mining and Task Mining. We tried to use the task binder where you record something and create a workflow from it, but it was not very useful for us. The output was not very useful for us. The documentation from it was also not useful for us.

If you are evaluating UiPath and other products, I would advise looking at what kind of model you are looking for. Are you looking for a more federated model or a centralized model?  You should look at what kind of governance you need in place for the solution you are looking for. One type of solution is that you put it in someone's hands and leave it and forget it. If you want to empower people and maintain central control, UiPath would be for you.

In terms of deployment, I would go for the automation cloud every time. There is the ease of use of not having to worry about standing up your own servers to monitor that. The US cloud especially has been very stable.

Overall, I would rate UiPath a nine out of ten.

We use UiPath to automate the repetitive tasks typically performed by knowledge workers, with a primary focus on areas such as finance, HR, and supply chain.

Starting with UI automation is valuable as it mirrors users' existing workflows, building their confidence before expanding into more powerful automation methods.

There are instances when the introduction of new features or concepts can be a bit overwhelming for users.

I have been using UiPath for five years now.

I would rate its stability capabilities nine out of ten as there is always room for improvement.

It offers excellent scalability. I would rate it ten out of ten.

When we were initially planning our move to the cloud, we reached out to the support team for guidance. Our account executive connected us with the UiPath professional service team, who were incredibly helpful in addressing all our inquiries and concerns. Even our cybersecurity team had many security questions, and they provided comprehensive answers to ensure our transition was well-informed and secure. I would rate it ten out of ten.

Positive

The initial setup was complex due to the various components involved, such as Orchestration, Kibana, document storage, and databases. Each of these had its own installation and maintenance requirements, which was a constant task.

We needed to streamline the installation to focus more on building automation rather than dealing with upgrades and maintenance, so we migrated the deployment to the cloud. This transition reduced the complexity associated with interfaces and orchestration.

The pricing is quite reasonable.

Our company evaluated multiple leading tools and ultimately chose UiPath. One important factor was its open approach, offering a community edition for users to learn and explore the platform without an initial purchase. This approach fosters community development and creates a vast knowledge pool, making UiPath stand out. It encourages individuals to learn and explore the tool before transitioning to the enterprise version, while also providing a valuable talent pool for support and assistance.

My advice is to encourage exploring the platform, although it might be overwhelming due to its rapidly expanding features. While there may be initial confusion regarding UiPath's focus on AI, recent events have clarified its core message. It empowers users to deliver the models they create, integrating smoothly with enterprise systems. It enhances automation capabilities while incorporating AI elements, ultimately putting you in control of the AI within the platform. 

I would rate UiPath ten out of ten.